Anyone who was alive for the conflagration in Iran 46 years ago, when the Shah of Iran was toppled and 52 American hostages were seized, had to figure a reckoning would eventually come for the Islamist extremists who took over the country. And when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent a direct message to the people of Iran on Saturday, June 14, saying he is “clearing the path” for them to reclaim their freedom — in Farsi, no less — it seemed to signal that something even larger than a war is brewing in the Middle East. A subsequent warning by a resolute President Trump to the 8 million residents of Teheran to evacuate lends further credence to the notion that Israeli ambitions go beyond just removing weapons.

While the Israelis have done a masterful job in severely weakening Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, Netanyahu’s plans undoubtedly don’t stop there. Iran’s economy is in tatters. Much of its leadership has been wiped out by Israeli airstrikes. Its terrorist proxies Hamas and Hezbollah have been decimated. Its reliable ally, Bashar Assad in Syria, has been overthrown. This means the Israelis are better positioned than ever to fulfill their long-held dream of regime change in Tehran. But while Iran is suffering devastating strategic deficits, the ultimate undoing of the regime may well be what Netanyahu capitalized on in his message to Iranians: how little support the mullahs enjoy among their own people,

The Iranian regime might already have fallen if not for the intervention of President Trump. According to Reuters, the president vetoed a recent Israeli plan to kill Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, citing the fact that no Americans have yet died in the escalating conflict, a precondition set by the president for US military intervention. But after meeting with his security team throughout the day on Tuesday, Trump is by most accounts actively considering whether to strike Tehran anytime now. One way or another, the walls are closing in swiftly around the crumbling remnants of the theocratic regime that seized power in 1979.

The most ironic element of this war and the possibility of regime change in Tehran is that almost all of Iran’s Arabic neighbors undoubtedly support or even appreciate Israel’s offensive. They can’t say so publicly for fear of being labeled as Zionist sympathizers, but, like Israel, they have been victimized by Iran acting as the regional bully. Khameini has long been intent on spreading his fundamentalist theology with violence and coercion while building a military program that has evidently come close to reaching the capacity to launch a nuclear-tipped missile at Israel or beyond.

But military action alone will not automatically translate into regime change. It would likely need to be accompanied by a popular uprising. Iran is nation of young people, with a median age of just 34 years old. We have seen spasms of the so-called “green revolution” among young Iranians over the years. The uprisings were crushed, but now the regime has been weakened as never before. Reza Pahlavi, son of the deposed Shah, has urged Iranians to seize this moment, declaring, “The regime is weak and divided … Iran is yours to reclaim.” This does not mean bringing an end to the regime will be easy. It would likely take a general strike and/or mass protests to persuade the regime’s security forces to switch sides, join the movement for freedom, and drive out the mullahs.

Revolution is often based on the perception of reality. If Khameini and his inner circle are forced to leave the country, as the Shah was in 1979, it would certainly embolden the majority of Iranians desperate to escape the tyranny of the Islamists. The government has attempted to dry up sources of information by shutting down the internet, but satellite-based platforms such as Elon Musk’s Starlink have managed to circumvent the blackout. Censorship doesn’t work like it did in 1979.

Liberty Nation depends on the support of our readers. Donate now!

So, if the mullahs are kicked to the curb, what would come next for Iran? Would the country slowly evolve into a more democratic form of government, adopt a different type of authoritarianism, or descend into chaos among competing or warring factions? We have seen all three of those scenarios play out in various countries over the years. But like the American colonists who risked everything to fight a war for independence from England almost 250 years ago, the Iranian people will have to decide whether the potential chaos that would follow the downfall of Khameini and company would be worth it in return for freedom they have long been denied. It’s a choice that they may well face in the immediate future.